Friday, April 03, 2009

Ezra Caught In Another

Caught in two really. Here we have a case from the BCHRT in which the complainant was ordered to pay costs (full decision, which I have not read yet, can be found here) to the respondents for a specious claim. But wait! According to The Ez, that isn't supposed to happen!

20 comments:

I'm not so sure I would take a letter from the CJC issued so late at face value. It does seem rather convenient and contrive - but hey if they want this to be the official story...Maybe Kinsella wanted to pall around with the JDL....

BCL,are you going down the "the emails were fake" road again...A while ago you conceded they were real.

You might want to check the sequence on the emails and the Jackal's "resignation". And you might want to check my blog to see if I ever stated he was "fired".

And why was the top line of the CJC letter redacted? And why didn't Kinsella publish it himself? And why didn't Bernie, who was "in the room" so to speak sign the letter rather than the Co-Presidents of the CJC who most assuredly were not?

BCL, if you want to carry water for the Jackal, be my guest, but do yourself the favour of being just the tiniest bit skeptical when letters are produced a month after the fact just as Macleans is poking around.

However, the good news is that Bernie is no longer stuck with the NDA so you can give him a call and get the story.

Oh, and noonespecial200, you asked for Ezra's reaction and got it. You goot two comments from me but you are too chickenshit to publish them or answer the simple question: where did you get the letter.